Promise #4 – Comments on “The Problem with Network Folders”

Refer: 14 Unfulfilled Promises


In the post “Comments on ‘The Problem with Network Folders'” I made a few arguments against the claim that Network Folders were no longer of any use.

Then I promised I would go into this further in a later post.


Promise Fulfilled!

In the post “Using a network file share – a case study” I described where Network Folders are still useful.

Related Post

The Certified Information Professional is not an island

The Certified Information Professional is not an island

In “AIIM’s CIP Certification – it’s a map.” I compared AIIM’s CIP certification to a land made up of different villages, and areas, each with their own skilled residents. 

When I originally started writing that post, I had a vision of an island where each knowledge domain represented a part of the island, which further contained representations of the “sub-domains”.

Certified Information Professional - not an island

And, that’s when I drew the “map” that can be seen in that post.

However, after I had written the post I realized that that map shouldn’t have actually been of an island.

An island, by definition, is not a continuous landmass and is surrounded by water.

The Certified Information Professional is not an island

With an island, there is no connection with other islands or, for that matter, with other countries (especially if you looked at the map I drew). It is separate from everything else.

This was very, very wrong.

The whole idea of an Information Professional, as defined by the CIP certification is, (and as Jesse Wilkins described it in his post “Are you T-shaped?“), someone who has a good, broad, knowledge of the different territories (knowledge domains), someone who has travelled the highways of the land, and knows enough to be able to get around each territory without the use of GPS, or SatNav.

The Certified Information Professional knows enough about the customs of each territory, city, or village that they can communicate and interact easily with the locals of each area. If they need more in-depth local knowledge, they can hire a guide, but they have enough knowledge that they can see how each city, town, or village, interacts with the others.

The Certified Information Professional can see the “big picture”.

And this why the CIP map that I drew is not right. The land that I described is not isolated. It makes up part of a “global” environment and it interacts with other “lands”.

Think of it as a landlocked country in a continent made up of multiple countries (Europe for example). It takes advantages of its local talent, and specialized knowledge, but it interacts with the other countries. It requires them for services, and resources, that it doesn’t have. Just as the other countries, in turn, require the local skills and resources that it can provide.

So, from this, you can see that “CIP Land” is not an island. It’s a country. A country surrounded by other countries.

Information Management can’t exist without databases, without networks, without hard drives, or storage areas. Hell, if CIP Land was an island, my friend, the certified Information Professional wouldn’t exist for long.

Clearly my map of “CIP Island” needs to be redrawn…

Recommended Resources

Related Post

AIIM’s CIP Certification – it’s a map.

AIIM’s CIP Certification

What it is that I like about AIIM’s CIP certification, is that it helps you become part of a bigger world.

What do I mean by this?

Well – think of your “Information Professional” as someone living in a village.

A village called “Content Management”. They do their job and do it well. They’re not aware of the fact that beyond their own village lies a whole world. Then the person travels. Maybe they have to visit another area for their work, or they see people from other areas

Maybe they have to visit another area for their work, or they see people from other areas visiting and decide to go exploring. In any case, they get to see new sights or learn new things. The world, for them, however, is still uncharted.

I have lived in this land, and I also only knew of only a few areas. Gradually, however, I have travelled and seen new things.

At one point I started actively seeking out other residents. We all seemed to talk a common language, but each person had their own “regional” vernacular, or way of saying things. Each had their own experience and knowledge based on the areas where they were living. We learnt from each other.

The land we lived on was still uncharted. It had no boundary or borders. No-one knew where it started or stopped, or what places made up the land.

However, the CIP defines what knowledge an Information Professional should have. It creates a map of that land. 

Looking at the map, I have come to realize that this collection of experiences and knowledge that I have from my many trips through different areas all fits into a big picture.

And that is what I like about the CIP. I now can look at it, and get an idea of the various places that make up this world.

I know which areas I need to revisit, or spend more time in, to give myself a more rounded set of knowledge and skills to be able to call myself an Information Professional.

AIIM's CIP certification - map

Recommended Resources

Related Post

Europe Momentum 2011 – Resources for those who couldn’t be there…

This year’s EMC’s European Momentum is being was held in Berlin.

The Momentum conference is something I have always tried to attend. It  is a great opportunity to:

  • find out what EMC’s strategies are.
  • Attend great sessions to learn more
  • Meet great people
  • Share ideas & experiences,
  • etc, etc.
So – what if you can’t couldn’t attend?
I’m trying to put together a list of resources that will give you the opportunity to follow Momentum online.

Hopefully I will be adding to this page as I find more excellent ways to “be there” (virtually).

Also check out my Google+ stream. I’ll post regular updates there as well. (


  • Blogs from EMC World 2011, Las Vegas
  • InsideDocumentum Momentum 2011 posts
  • Notes from the Momentum 2011 session ”Current and Future Architecture of Documentum” – Alexandra
  • Reflections from Momentum 2011 Berlin – Alexandra
  • Jeroen van Rotterdam’s Blog
  • The ADLIB blog
  • The Momentum 2011 Perspective on EMC Documentum in Q3/2012
    – Ed SteenHoek
  • Momentum Overview – Tim de Grave
  • Momentum 2011 – all the videos

  • More to come…


  • EMC’s Momentum Conference on Facebook – click on MMTM Berlin – Live to see some great streaming video of the keynotes, and sessions.

Official site

  • Momentum Berlin 2011 sitelists the sessions, the speakers, the exhibitions, etc, etc

  • EMC World On Demandpresentations, sessions, etc from the EMC World, Las Vegas 2011

  • Event page in the Documentum Community

Images and Videos from the Conference

  • Momentum 2011 – all the videos

  • Images from the conference on Flikr

  • EMC Momentum 2011 (LA/Berlin) on YouTube

  • Momentum Berlin playlist on YouTube
  • Opening act at the Keynote Presentation
  • Opening Keynote from Momentum 2011 Berlin


  • Momentum Tweets (Streaming)


  • Momentum on Slideshare

Related Post

CMIS is here … but where?

Note – this post is in a draft format. It was written in June 2010 and was never published. The information in this post is not complete.
I have released it now as part of my AIIM CMIS Product Guide post.

CMIS 1.0 was ratified in the beginning of May 2010. This is the standard that will allow interoperability between the various content management systems that are currently on the market. For more information on CMIS, refer my Small Brain Notes on CMIS. Go and read it now, and when you are finished, click on the back button. I’ll be waiting…

Ok – now that you understand a bit of what CMIS will offer, let’s ask the question – when will it be available in these disparate content electronic content management systems?

Let’s look at the list of companies that were associated with the creation on CMIS 1.0

And…who is ready for CMIS?


  • ECM – EMC have stated that Documentum 6.7 is CMIS complant. This is due out in 2011.
  • Microsoft,k
  • IBM
    • Have released a servlet that sits on Websphere. This allows CMIS clients to access IBM FileNet and IBM Content Manager repositories. (
    • IBM are also

These three  were there in the beginning, and developed the initial draft.


The following companies also played a part in the moulding and shaping of the CMIS standard:

  • Alfresco – Version 3.3 (available now)
  • Open Text,
  • Oracle,
  • SAP

Others Adapting their systems to be CMIS compliant:

  • ASG Software Solutions
  • Content Technologies ApS
  • Day Software
  • Ektron
  • Exalead, Inc.
  • FatWire
  • Flatiron Solutions Corporation
  • Greenbytes GmbH
  • Harris Corporation
  • Nuxeo
  • Saperion AG
  • Sun Microsystems
  • Vignette Corporatio

Here is a list of the vendors with regards CMIS compliance.

Vendor Product CMIS Support Timeline
Alfresco Alfresco 3.2 Available for testing
EMC Documentum First half of 2010
IBM Content Manager Second First half of 2010
IBM FileNet P8 Second First half of 2010
KnowledgeTree KnowledgeTree 3.7 Available for testing
Microsoft SharePoint Server 2010 First half of 2010
Nuxeo Nuxeo DMS 5.3 Available for testing
Open Text Enterprise Library Services (ELS-Beta) CMIS connector available now
Open Text Open Text ECM 10 Mid 2010
Oracle Oracle Universal Content Management Not known
SAP SAP DMS Not known
Sense/Net Sense/Net 6.0 Available for testing
  • AIIM’s CMIS Product Guide!!! (

Related Post

The Wingspan Connection – getting SharePoint & Documentum to talk to each other

This is just a short post.  Just want to show an overview of how Wingspan components  allow a user to access their Documentum documents from SharePoint.

wingspan spx sharepoint documentum firstdoc emc

Taken from Wingspan Documentation

Here you can see that there are two main components:

The DocWay UI is a collection of Web Parts installed on a SharePoint Server .

The DocWay Server comprises two components that are always installed together even though they function independently.

  • The DocWay Web Service provides Search, Content Management, and Workflow services.
  • The DocWay Content Transfer Service (DocWay Transfer Service) provides transfer of content between the user’s desktop and individual Documentum Docbases

So, basically, what happens is:

  • A user logs into their SharePoint site that contains Web Parts supplied by the DocWay UI.
  • These Web Parts display meta-data gathered by the DocWay Server about content stored in the Documentum Docbases.
  • Should the user transfer content between their local storage and a Docbase, the transfer is made by the DocWay Transfer Service, bypassing SharePoint entirely.

Included Web Parts for End Users

  • Home Cabinet
  • Subscriptions
  • Checkouts
  • Recently Accessed Files
  • Inbox
  • My Workflows
  • Virtual Folders
  • Repository Browser
  • DQL Query
  • Object View
  • Search

Included Web Parts for Administrators

  • DocWay System Administrator
  • Menu Designer
  • Component Administration
  • Web Part Group Settings

Included Web Parts for Developers

  • DocWay Diagnostics
  • AJAX Call Viewer
  • HTTP Request Inspector
  • System Information

Wingspan produce several other products that allow integration between Documentum and SharePoint. One of these is eResults that I have posted several times about in this blog (see Tag Cloud).

Related Posts

  • New & Classic – Ways that SharePoint & Traditional ECM systems can play together

Related Post

Momentum Lisbon – A welcome invitation.

I was invited out for dinner after the Welcome Reception by CSC.

CSC offer a product called FirstDoc that adds a compliance layer to Documentum. As well as that, they have products that allows documents in a  Documentum repository to be exposed in SharePoint, while maintaining 96% of the functionality of FirstDoc.

It was a very pleasant evening, and the meal that was served was wonderful.

Thanks Nigel, Paul, Chris & Jim.

  • New EMC Solutions for Healthcare, Life Sciences, and Energy Industries

Related Post

Case Study – A social Content Management system

A social Content Management system

What is a social software system?.

In this post, I discuss this very question and look at a fictional company to determine whether their Content Management system is a social one,or not.


Seven Social Software Elements

In a 2007 post, “Social Software Building Blocks“, Gene Smith defines seven social software elements.

These are:

  • Identity – a way of uniquely identifying people in the system
  • Presence – a way of knowing who is online, available or otherwise nearby
  • Relationships – a way of describing how two users in the system are related (e.g. contacts, friends of family)
  • Conversations – a way of talking to other people through the system
  • Groups – a way of forming communities of interest
  • Reputation – a way of knowing the status of other people in the system (who’s a good citizen? who can be trusted?)
  • Sharing – a way of sharing things that are meaningful to participants (like photos or videos)

Each social software system had three or more of these elements (but not necessarily all of the elements).

Download a larger version


Case Study

Using Gene’s list, I decided to do a case study where I analyse a fictional document management system and see how it measures up.

The Company: Wet Cleaver Drywear

Background: Wet Cleaver Dry Goods designs and manufactures ready-to-wear clothing for farmers. This includes rainwear, winter clothing, informal dress clothing, hats, gloves, etc.

It has factories in three different countries. It uses an Oracle-based Content Management system to store and manage, clothing designs, as well as operating procedures, sales information, customer feedback, and press releases, etc. Designs and patterns are sensitive and need to be tracked. Operating Procedures need to follow a Review process before being available for use. Press Releases need to be routed to the appropriate managers for sign-off before being released, and customer feedback has to be routed to the appropriate department heads. Security is applied to the documents ensuring that they can only be edited by members of each particular department. Each user has an Active Directory account, and a matching account in the CMS. Exchange is used for e-mails.

To provide users with a more “accessible” interface, SharePoint has been used to create a Portal. Each department has its own site which is populated with special web parts that provide access to the documents in the Oracle-based Content Management system, as well as its native functions.

Each web site has been designed by the IT department, based on discussion with the end-users to meet the “requirements” the department the site is intended for. SharePoint groups have been created for each department and populated with the users’ active directory accounts. Each site is secured so that only members of each department can access the related site, and, to ensure that a consistent look-and-feel is maintained, as well as to reduce support issues, the users do not have the right to create new sites themselves, or to customise the sites (“My Sites”). If users from different departments need to work on a document together, a SharePoint site is created along with a SharePoint document library. The required documents are placed in the document library by the CMS administrators, and specific users are granted access to the site. Further to this, a SharePoint Search Center has been created, and with the use of a special protocol handler, is able to index the contents of the oracle-based CMS. Users, however, are only able to find documents that they have rights to.

A separate SharePoint site has been set up to store FAQs, lists of who is in each department, etc.



Does this system have three, or more (or any) of the elements that Gene listed? Let’s have a look…

  • Identity – In this system, each user needs to be logged into the network to access the Portal. Pass-through authentication is used. Thus, each user can be uniquely identified.
  • Presence – Although the user can see that they are logged on (their username is displayed on the screen), there is no way to know who else is logged into the system at the same time.
  • Relationships – The Portal has been designed to provide a slightly easier way of performing the tasks that would normally take place in the CMS. That is the processing of documents. As mentioned above, there is a separate site that lists who is in each department.
  • Conversations – When users need to communicate with each other they use Exchange. This is, however, separate from the CMS/Portal.
  • Groups – The Portal is strictly controlled. IT can create special sites that meet specific requirements, and then users are granted access on an as-needed basis. The CMS administrators export files out of the CMS into the site’s document library where the users can work on them. While this can be considered as a type of community forming, the fact that it is strictly controlled, and not an ad-hoc process negates this.
  • Reputation – Apart from the fact that a list is maintained (on a separate site) of who works in each department, and their positions, there is no way to determine the “reputation” of a particular user (e.g. the person who has created the most operating procedures, or has provided the most valuable feedback during a review process).
  • Sharing – The only sharing that occurs is the routing of documents. This is not done in an ad hoc fashion but is defined by business rules, and pre-defined workflows. As such, there is no sharing.


Social Software Honeycomb

Something else that Gene had done in his post was to create a social software honeycomb.

Each element is represented by a hexagon. Each hexagon is shaded depending on whether the particular system supported the social element.

Looking at the Document Management system of Wet Cleaver Dry Goods, the honeycomb would look like this:

Click on the image to tweet it

Clearly this system does not contain three, or more, of Gene’s social elements.


  • Identity – a way of uniquely identifying people in the system
  • Presence – a way of knowing who is online, available or otherwise nearby
  • Relationships – a way of describing how two users in the system are related (e.g. in Flickr, people can be contacts, friends of family)
  • Conversations – a way of talking to other people through the system
  • Groups – a way of forming communities of interest
  • Reputation – a way of knowing the status of other people in the system (who’s a good citizen? who can be trusted?)
  • Sharing – a way of sharing things that are meaningful to participants (like photos or videos

* Identity – a way of uniquely identifying people in the system

* Presence – a way of knowing who is online, available or otherwise nearby

* Relationships – a way of describing how two users in the system are related (e.g. in Flickr, people can be contacts, friends of family)

* Conversations – a way of talking to other people through the system

* Groups – a way of forming communities of interest

* Reputation – a way of knowing the status of other people in the system (who’s a good citizen? who can be trusted?)

* Sharing – a way of sharing things that are meaningful to participants (like photos or videos)

  • )

Related Post